3 ms·

Why should a global decentralized currency be beholden to local regulation? I guess the lesson is to do a fair launch and run nicehash to control a large perce

Why should a global decentralized currency be beholden to local regulation? I guess the lesson is to do a fair launch and run nicehash to control a large percentage of the network. Then you don't have to abide by SEC regulation as the coin does not represent a centralized organization.

eropple 9y ago
> Why should a global decentralized currency be beholden to local regulation? Because people, who are the important factor here and not your burnt CPU cycles, live in those localities and have generally agreed to live in this thing called "society" where regulations are made within that society's jurisdiction.
PeterisP 9y ago
A local currency should be beholden to local regulation. A global decentralized currency should be beholden to every local regulation in which it is used, since the users fall under that jurisdiction - if it's not compatible with local regulation, then it should stay away from that locality and the people there. In particular, ICOs should care about USA regulation if they want to attract money from people in USA; they can freely ignore SEC iff they keep their activities outside of USA and don't attempt to market their "investment" to customers in USA.
chickenfries 9y ago
> Why should a global decentralized currency be beholden to local regulation? I dunno why can't you declare your house an independent country and live under your own rules?
s73ver_ 9y ago
I've not heard any reason why these ICOs are any different than any other security. Simply being "on a computer" never should have been enough for patents, and it most definitely isn't enough here.
- hyprCoin 9y ago
  Look at chain coin. A crypto currency that was a scam coin, people lost a lot of money and the original developer dumped his supply. It did not die, different people are now picking up the chain and making it a more valuable currency. The point is not that these currencies are "on a computer", the point is that they represent a collective interest that lives beyond borders.
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    And why couldn't that happen without the scam component?
    - hyprCoin 9y ago
      It likely wouldn't exist without the scam component. The original developer never intended to follow through with his vision, but it was a good enough vision that many people decided it was worth investing in and working towards. My point was that there are regularization factors in the market that exist without a centralized organization rubber stamping actions. Of course, that doesn't fit the narrative that people, especially the poor and intelligent, must be protected from themselves.
      - s73ver_ 9y ago
        I honestly do not believe that. If it was a good idea, it would be possible to create it in a non-scammy way. My point is that there is no reason to not have the disclosure and reporting regulations in place. You really have not countered that. And claiming that there is a narrative about protecting people from themselves really doesn't work when we're talking about regulations designed to disclose the information that would allow them to make those decisions.
        hyprCoin 9y ago
        Regulations provide an avenue for rejecting actions. This avenue can be subsequently abused by bad actors - for example, accredited investment is abused by the wealthy to extend their opportunities at the expense of the middle class and poor. Feel free to buy lottery tickets or gamble, just don't let us catch you investing in a startup seed round.

eropple 9y ago

> Why should a global decentralized currency be beholden to local regulation? Because people, who are the important factor here and not your burnt CPU cycles, live in those localities and have generally agreed to live in this thing called "society" where regulations are made within that society's jurisdiction.

PeterisP 9y ago

A local currency should be beholden to local regulation. A global decentralized currency should be beholden to every local regulation in which it is used, since the users fall under that jurisdiction - if it's not compatible with local regulation, then it should stay away from that locality and the people there. In particular, ICOs should care about USA regulation if they want to attract money from people in USA; they can freely ignore SEC iff they keep their activities outside of USA and don't attempt to market their "investment" to customers in USA.

chickenfries 9y ago

> Why should a global decentralized currency be beholden to local regulation? I dunno why can't you declare your house an independent country and live under your own rules?

s73ver_ 9y ago

I've not heard any reason why these ICOs are any different than any other security. Simply being "on a computer" never should have been enough for patents, and it most definitely isn't enough here.

hyprCoin 9y ago
Look at chain coin. A crypto currency that was a scam coin, people lost a lot of money and the original developer dumped his supply. It did not die, different people are now picking up the chain and making it a more valuable currency. The point is not that these currencies are "on a computer", the point is that they represent a collective interest that lives beyond borders.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  And why couldn't that happen without the scam component?
  - hyprCoin 9y ago
    It likely wouldn't exist without the scam component. The original developer never intended to follow through with his vision, but it was a good enough vision that many people decided it was worth investing in and working towards. My point was that there are regularization factors in the market that exist without a centralized organization rubber stamping actions. Of course, that doesn't fit the narrative that people, especially the poor and intelligent, must be protected from themselves.
    - s73ver_ 9y ago
      I honestly do not believe that. If it was a good idea, it would be possible to create it in a non-scammy way. My point is that there is no reason to not have the disclosure and reporting regulations in place. You really have not countered that. And claiming that there is a narrative about protecting people from themselves really doesn't work when we're talking about regulations designed to disclose the information that would allow them to make those decisions.
      - hyprCoin 9y ago
        Regulations provide an avenue for rejecting actions. This avenue can be subsequently abused by bad actors - for example, accredited investment is abused by the wealthy to extend their opportunities at the expense of the middle class and poor. Feel free to buy lottery tickets or gamble, just don't let us catch you investing in a startup seed round.